Welcome

Welcome to the POZ/AIDSmeds Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and
others concerned about HIV/AIDS. Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the
conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning: Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive
and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a
username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own
physician.

All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators
of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ/AIDSmeds community forums.

We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please
provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are
true and correct to their knowledge.

It's seriously monstrous to imagine that trillions and trillions of money are needed to bail out mostly financial corps and yet may still be insufficient; and to think we were already once in awe of how much Bill Gates has in his $60-72 billion coffers. It's unimaginable therefore to even consider such amount of money can exist in the bailout.It's clearly a man made black hole that keeps sucking in money. Alot are accountable but does not seem that anyone is strong or powerful enough to bring the guilty into consequence. We are in a serious serious breach of events by the evil players. Good luck to Obama in his quest to hold anyone accountable. The odds are way against his team. Too many powerful corrupted players in this global money game. Sucks!

No!!! It's eveyones problem for living beyond their means. Houses they can't afford, didn't even read the contracts. Credit card debts that they can't pay back. Borrowing money that they default on. So no, it's not ONE person's fault it's everyones. But don't fear, your kids, their kids and your great grand kids will have to pay for this mess that WE all made for them.

No!!! It's eveyones problem for living beyond their means. Houses they can't afford, didn't even read the contracts. Credit card debts that they can't pay back. Borrowing money that they default on. So no, it's not ONE person's fault it's everyones. But don't fear, your kids, their kids and your great grand kids will have to pay for this mess that WE all made for them.

Certainly, but the lenders should have been more careful and not done loans they knew couldn't be repaid. But nobody was watching over them.

Yes -- GWB demonstrated beyond any doubt that the calibre of an administration's appointees matters more than their politics . People appointed to roles by GWB were far more likely to be appointed on the basis of loyalty to the Bush family and purely political affiliation than on the basis of merit. Both Republicans and Democrats have pools of first rate talent to pick from. GWB did not pick from the top tier of the Republican pool. His appointees had neither the stature nor the capability of his father's or Ronald Reagan's. They were generally third rate and we are paying the price.

Having said that lets forget about partinship or perception. Certainly GWB had a hand in the mess. However, It has been known that the mess started before GWB and other hands had a part not necessarily Bushes administration. I've heard that Reaganomics certainly didn't help, former president Clinton had a part, Greenspan etc... and even more recently it has been reported that the economy was in trouble in the 90's but Wall Street earnings have shown a false sense of security in the economy over the past decade.

I know GWB is a big punching bag for everyone and he is blamed for everything from global warming to anything else that goes wrong. Lets get one thing straight...I certainly don't support the guy, however I think too many other people are getting a reprive which is my point. Certainly the easy or popular opinion is the country is messed up, "ohh it Bushes fault" but before we point fingers at one man lets dig a little deeper and look at the whole picture. Sure there are corrupt Republicans but the are equally corrupt Democrats as well.

There was a recent poll taken about this very topic on Time Magazine and 25 people were mentioned rather interesting. I don't know if the rankings are accurate however it does beg a lot of questions that are unanswered.

No!!! It's eveyones problem for living beyond their means. Houses they can't afford, didn't even read the contracts. Credit card debts that they can't pay back. Borrowing money that they default on. So no, it's not ONE person's fault it's everyones. But don't fear, your kids, their kids and your great grand kids will have to pay for this mess that WE all made for them.

You certainly hit the nail on the proverbial head. Too many people took risks, financial institutions let them do it and now those very people want to blame someone else on the mess were in.

And the Europeans here should keep in mind their own deficiencies surfacing -- like why a country of 300,000 people had a financial services industry so out of proportion with their own GDP that they immediately went bankrupt. Americans weren't the only ones playing Vegas roulette with derivatives, etc. And there are housing bubbles in Ireland, UK and Spain, etc.

No!!! It's eveyones problem for living beyond their means. Houses they can't afford, didn't even read the contracts. Credit card debts that they can't pay back. Borrowing money that they default on. So no, it's not ONE person's fault it's everyones. But don't fear, your kids, their kids and your great grand kids will have to pay for this mess that WE all made for them.

Well, kind of like carbon emission and global warming. Most of us have lived a fairly good life (in term of having good and stable food sources in the developed world, nice environment, etc), but those under the age of 10 are going to find the world a very different place when they're adults. But it's one thing to be personally responsible for driving a fuel efficiency car, use less papers, etc, it's another to have your government not admitting uncontrolled carbon emission is NOT causing global warming.

The point is - no one will hold back on spending when good times keep on rolling. We were told that the markets (stock, property, etc) were self-perfecting and reflecting all fundamentals the ways they were - the whole Chicago School BS.

The whole Bush administration not only bought it wholesale, they promoted it as they raged a war they couldn't afford. It was the whole MO of Bush II to do everything to NOT LET the public in America felt any side effects of a bad war; people have just started to pay attention to the real politics that involved appointments, etc; anyone that warned otherwise were silenced and not able to get into any positions of power.

IMHO the whole gambling on derivatives and so were almost "natural" progression as no one had any reason to expect the good times to stop. It's the job of any responsible administration to spot this trend and regulate according - Bush II is to blame because NOT only it has failed to spot it, and there're evidences that they have spotted, they did nothing about it because of politics.

Alas, the rest of the world follow the Americans. It's just the way of the world as it's. So we're now all in a pit.

Actually, it's not really G.Ws fault, but he sure didn't make it any better, fact is he made if even worse, he could have Stopped all of this drama, but, he really didn't care to..........and as for Obama, I wish him all the luck in the world, cuz he's gonna need it, I also don't see him really doing very much right now to help, but I'll give him a little Credit for at least trying to get it right, and get us all outta this Mess...but Obama has got his work cut-out-for-him

« Last Edit: March 07, 2009, 12:04:17 AM by denb45 »

Logged

"it's so nice to be insane, cause no-one ask you to explain" Helen Reddy cc 1974

Actually, it's not really G.Ws fault, but he sure didn't make it any better, fact is he made if even worse, he could have Stopped all of this drama, but, he really didn't care to..........and as for Obama, I wish him all the luck in the world, cuz he's gonna need it, I also don't see him really doing very much right now to help, but I'll give him a little Credit for at least trying to get it right, and get us all outta this Mess...but Obama has got his work cut-out-for-him

We'll soon see if Obama can spend us out of this debt. He already has the US in deeper debt than all the President's put together from George Washington to GWB. Now if China decides to say enough then the US is bankrupt. GM is to big to fail, how about the US are we to big to fail?

Maybe when the economical indicators where turning to orange already, GWB was visiting a school ?

GWB was somehow the president of the World.It just fail.

EU must become politically stronger. With half billions consumers, it's time for a change:Sooner or later, the world president will be EU I guess (eish some will hate me saying that).

I doubt it will be Chinese or Indian. But at least, in the EU, we are more social oriented.At the end of the day, we are not here to allow some to become rich (deregulation of the markets) but to all have a safe life (health insurance, unemployement and so).

I vote with those who would spreak responsibility generally.But how about everyone (and this is a lot of people) who insisted on certain returns from stock investments. Everyone encouraged making "money" and thus dividends from nothing real. Regulators and political leaders might have called this for what it is. I'm not sure most people with IRA and mutual funds and even most investors had a clue how risky it all was. Somebody - some wiz guys -- might have known, geez.

Logged

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

The repeating of talking head's attention getting headlines and the astounding lack of knowledge of the subject, simplistic solutions, silly questions. Never mind, sometimes when reading the forums I can actually feel my brain shrinking.

We'll soon see if Obama can spend us out of this debt. He already has the US in deeper debt than all the President's put together from George Washington to GWB. Now if China decides to say enough then the US is bankrupt. GM is to big to fail, how about the US are we to big to fail?

The highlighted statement is misleading in the implication that Obama is responsible for today's debt burden.

If you look at the US deficit over time it is a FACT (honest cross my heart -- even George Will admits it) that the deficit (the increase in federal debt) has been highest under Republican Presidents. In fact, the last time we started to pay down debt was under a Democrat (Clinton). It took GWB only a year to go from a surplus position to a deficit.

Even if you remove direct blame from Bush for many of his policies (or lack thereof) and their effect on the economy, one thing he is indisputably to blame for is having gotten this country into an astronomically expensive and, on top of that, completely unnecessary war. And if that weren't bad enough, he didn't even know how to "run" the war.

It's estimated that at the end of the day the Iraq war will cost upwards of $1.7 to 2.7 TRILLION (and counting@@!). By 2008 the war was costing $12 BILLION a MONTH@! One study by Nobel-prizewinning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz states, re: both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, "Estimating all economic and social costs might push the U.S. war bill up toward $5 TRILLION by 2017." The bulk of that is for the Iraq war.

There was a study done a few years ago on the monetary cost of the war that determined that for the money the U.S. has spent on the Iraq war we could have fixed every road and bridge in the country, re-built every school in the country state of the art, fixed Social Security and Medicare, given quality health care coverage to every person in the country and many many more things that I can't remember off the top of my head. And of course we're just talking about the economic repercussions here, let's not forget the human toll the war has taken, with so many soldiers and civilians dead or injured and all the suffering that entails.

I don't think Bush is "evil," etc., just supremely incompetent and irresponsible and yes, he is solely to blame for the Iraq war, only him and nobody else, not even Cheney, because as Commander-in-Chief he had the last word. As Harry Truman famously stated about the office of the President, "The buck stops here."

The highlighted statement is misleading in the implication that Obama is responsible for today's debt burden.

If you look at the US deficit over time it is a FACT (honest cross my heart -- even George Will admits it) that the deficit (the increase in federal debt) has been highest under Republican Presidents. In fact, the last time we started to pay down debt was under a Democrat (Clinton). It took GWB only a year to go from a surplus position to a deficit.

Let's keep it to honest arguments ok?

Then I suggest you do some reading. Obama has us in the largest US Debt in the history of the US and he's done it within 3 months.

Then I suggest you do some reading. Obama has us in the largest US Debt in the history of the US and he's done it within 3 months.

The suggestion that "he's done it" is palpably false with respect to the debt which was run up by George Bush. One minute into Obama's presidency the debt was higher than under George Bush -- but that does not indicate that Obama caused it -- simply that GWB left things in a mess.

You suggest additional reading. Here is a chart which may be instructive.

It is quite puzzling to me why anyone, especially any Republican, would want to defend the record of GWB. There were many far more successful Republican Presidents -- if you use up all your bullets defending GWB you will have no credibility left when it comes to people of actual merit.

*** edited to addI appear to have linked the wrong chart -- but it is pretty helpful in seeing what has happened so I left it up. Here is a link to the chart showing that the debt as a percent of GDP is NOT at an all time high but is currently lower than it was after WWII. While the chart ends in 2007, the result continues to hold true even after the stimulus and budget package.

To understand the our crisis were in a few people (not all) need to understand that back 1990's there was a false sense of security as I mentioned earlier. If you look at consumer spending many people were living beyond their means through recent times. People had to have the latest gadgets, own a home at whatever cost. Now people are starting to learn the hard way how important saving and personal responsible financial decisions are.

It is widely rumored that Clinton had a big hand in the Subprime mortgage crisis, and that the origin of the crisis actually dated back to the Jimmy Carter era, other notable persons being blamed are Phil Gramm, and Alan Greenspan.

It is widely suspected that since Clinton eased banking regulations thus increasing hedge funds and subprime mortgages. Not to mention a poorly executed NAFTA plan which outsourced many jobs overseas. What about Nixon ending trading on the Gold Standard? Truth be told all this corruptness goes way back, and there are many opinions and finger pointing

It is true however that Clinton was credited with reducing the deficit, and balancing the budget.

Economist Keynes believed that if the Government micromanages the economy and throws more money at the problem it will in turn creates liquidity in the economy will eventually fix the problem "Big government". Milton Friedman believed that implementing Keynesian Economics can cause 'Stagflation" (low growth and high inflation). That is what seems to have happened with all these bailouts.

Milton Freidman originally a Keynes supporter eventually revised changed his economic views to the opposite. He believed that less government oversight and monetarism over the economy will fix the problem. One such President that seem to practice his views was Reagan which therefore created "Reagonomics" creating more deregulation and "small government". There is belief that Reagonmics was bad for the economy.

My economics professor in college once said "if you put a bunch of economists in the same room they will never agree".

As mentioned by others Bush didn't help the economy but he didn't create the problem either. He may be credited with putting the final nail in the coffin. Surely defense spending ate up a chunk of the budget but he's not the first President to do such a thing.

Bush did a lot of things wrong no doubt. Sure he was Commander-In Chief and should be accountable for the level of responsibility he was entrusted. It is ironic that Congress will blame the President while taking none of the blame when in fact they went ahead and did contrary to what they preached. One thing that gets me is how easily some people of society can be easily swayed by the media Fox, CNN etc... to learn all they need to know about politics and the world’s problems.

Perhaps we should all look at various politicians, entrepreneurs, and other leaders to share in the blame. Having said that you can't tell me that certain consumers can look in the mirror and say it's not my fault with a straight face.

What is my point? Well you have all these Economists that have an expert opinion on how to fix the economy, can it be fixed? And of course you have a bunch of armchair experts in the blogosphere and various internet forums that claim to know the answer to life’s mysteries.

I would be the first to tell you I don’t have the slightest idea where the economy is going, and how to fix it. I do believe you should let some companies fail as harsh as it sounds. It has been said that the stock market has it ups and downs, and will eventually fix itself.

I can’t remember how many times in the 80’s-90’s the government warned us against a possible recession back then and the market improved suddenly, perhaps artificially or not.

The reason why they should fail is that the economy will recover quicker. Of course there would be some sharper drops and repercussions over the short term. Uncertainty we now face. Instead were now on the hook for Trillions of dollars and that will take much longer to dig out of our hole.

I hope Obama can at least reduce the deficit and lessen the effects of this recession but wow! Those are some big shoes to fill.

Maybe when the economical indicators where turning to orange already, GWB was visiting a school ?

GWB was somehow the president of the World.It just fail.

EU must become politically stronger. With half billions consumers, it's time for a change:Sooner or later, the world president will be EU I guess (eish some will hate me saying that).

I doubt it will be Chinese or Indian. But at least, in the EU, we are more social oriented.At the end of the day, we are not here to allow some to become rich (deregulation of the markets) but to all have a safe life (health insurance, unemployement and so).

Now there are hopes with Obama. But how much of them are realistics ?

This is the same doom and gloom statements I see about other countries saying we will never recover when in fact you assume EU will be the new world leader. Let me clue you in China. is now the 3rd best economy in the world, Considering China hasn’t floated the Yen against our dollar even in good times show they have agenda to become the world economic power, and India is not doing bad either considering we shipped many computer, and aviation jobs to India.

Believe it or not The US is not doing as bad as some other countries but we are in a recession. If things go right things could rebound again., then again we never know either. Only time will tell.

Actually, it's not really G.Ws fault, but he sure didn't make it any better, fact is he made if even worse, he could have Stopped all of this drama, but, he really didn't care to..........and as for Obama, I wish him all the luck in the world, cuz he's gonna need it, I also don't see him really doing very much right now to help, but I'll give him a little Credit for at least trying to get it right, and get us all outta this Mess...but Obama has got his work cut-out-for-him

Even if you remove direct blame from Bush for many of his policies (or lack thereof) and their effect on the economy, one thing he is indisputably to blame for is having gotten this country into an astronomically expensive and, on top of that, completely unnecessary war. And if that weren't bad enough, he didn't even know how to "run" the war.

It's estimated that at the end of the day the Iraq war will cost upwards of $1.7 to 2.7 TRILLION (and counting@@!). By 2008 the war was costing $12 BILLION a MONTH@! One study by Nobel-prizewinning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz states, re: both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, "Estimating all economic and social costs might push the U.S. war bill up toward $5 TRILLION by 2017." The bulk of that is for the Iraq war.

There was a study done a few years ago on the monetary cost of the war that determined that for the money the U.S. has spent on the Iraq war we could have fixed every road and bridge in the country, re-built every school in the country state of the art, fixed Social Security and Medicare, given quality health care coverage to every person in the country and many many more things that I can't remember off the top of my head. And of course we're just talking about the economic repercussions here, let's not forget the human toll the war has taken, with so many soldiers and civilians dead or injured and all the suffering that entails.

I don't think Bush is "evil," etc., just supremely incompetent and irresponsible and yes, he is solely to blame for the Iraq war, only him and nobody else, not even Cheney, because as Commander-in-Chief he had the last word. As Harry Truman famously stated about the office of the President, "The buck stops here."

I would agree with you however this was only one part of the whole problem and GWB’s contribution to the deficit etc.... Yes Bush spent lots of money on Defense like I said earlier he could be considered the nail in the coffin. Understand though there were other underlying factors in the puzzle contributing to entire mess like the mortgage crisis, greed and corruption amongst past politicians, insider trading, Wall Street, The Corporate world, etc…

Point is were in this mess now and it has to be fixed. Had 9/11 never happened or troops never going in to Afghanistan or Iraq who knows what would have happened? What of the economy collapsed during Obama’s tenure? Guilty or not Obama would be getting blamed.

GWB have been in charge of the country for 8 years. He can't be responsible for nothing.Or he is responsible for nothing and that is indeed the problem..

GWB have upset the world for 8 years (including your EU cousins and brothers), have lie to you guys (american), have won election he should have loose, have refuse to do anything for the global warming etc and as if all that was not enough, he is having responsibilities now in a major world economical crisis, despite his departure.

It is widely rumored that Clinton had a big hand in the Subprime mortgage crisis, and that the origin of the crisis actually dated back to the Jimmy Carter era, other notable persons being blamed are Phil Gramm, and Alan Greenspan.

This is the kind of misinformation that is being spread by mostly the right wing that really gets to my nerve. If you want to make a point at least make it correctly.. (sorry, please don't take it as a personal attack; I am just arguing based on facts).

Subprime load is nothing new and it also preferred to loads given to people with bad credit records. Since they have a higher rate of default the borrowers charge higher interest rates and fees. Many institutes entered this market in the early 1990s the interest rate was low, and there's nothing inherently wrong with lending to those with bad credit history as the risks are spread; and when it involves banks, i.e. public trustees of our deposits, as long as they are properly regulated by adequate laws that forbid them from taking too much risk, subprime load is just part of our normal economic activities.

People try to blame Clinton not because of subprime load/mortgage, but Fannie Mae was his baby, an underwriter of those mortgages founded in 1998. But the creation of Fannie was based on sound social policy that a lot of institutes were racially profiling borrowers. I will leave it others to argue whether it's a good idea to engage wholesale home ownership, but there again is nothing wrong with the system itself if properly regulated.

The whole root of the crisis is essentially these: (1) right under the noise of Bush II administration, the banks/institutes involved in giving out subprime loads were engaging in predatory practices of misrepresenting the risks to borrowers; (2) banks/institutes were allowed, again under Bush II supervision and further deregulation, to package those loads into trade-able securities, thereby (i) misrepresenting the level of risk the financial institutes were getting themselves into by giving out those dodgy loads, (ii) spreading the risk globally.

All the whole interest rate was kept low for political agenda, and the US govt itself was involving in reckless lending with nothing to base on other than the voodoo economy of Reagan era, i.e. debt is NOT a problem.

All economy goes in boom-bust cycle, even Greenspan, who was once God, with his tail between his legs, admitted that the whole MO of the last 8 years was to delay the bust; which, if you think about it, was right about the time of his statement of "irrational exuberance". He KNEW what he was doing at the time, which was to let the economy soft land but there was a political agenda to serve.

People try to blame Clinton not because of subprime load/mortgage, but Fannie Mae was his baby, an underwriter of those mortgages founded in 1998. But the creation of Fannie was based on sound social policy that a lot of institutes were racially profiling borrowers. I will leave it others to argue whether it's a good idea to engage wholesale home ownership, but there again is nothing wrong with the system itself if properly regulated.

Actually Fannie Mae was created by FDR in 1938. Not quite clear what the point was here?

But your main point, that regulators appointed by Bush failed to respond to changes in the market is, I believe, precisely on point. The TIME article and other histories that attempt to parcel out blame for this stuff back to the 90's or even the 70's fail to appreciate how quickly financial products have evolved and how determinedly focused the Bush regulatory team was on treating each new financial innovation as a way to evade market regulation by blithely assuming all new products were blessed by the market and therefore could never in aggregate generate market failure.

Actually Fannie Mae was created by FDR in 1938. Not quite clear what the point was here?

Thanks for pointing that out! My bad, in my rather agitated stage I made a BIG mistake on fact...

What I meant to point out is people linking Clinton to the subprime crisis is that in 1998 he made Fannie relaxed credit requirements on the loans it would purchase from other banks and lenders, in the hope that it would ease these restrictions and result in increased loan availability for minority and low-income buyers, thereby linking my point of financial institutes racially profiling minority (i.e. black) in obtaining subprime loads.

To add to Assurbanipal post. In 1968, with the pressures of the Vietnam War straining the national budget, President Lyndon Johnson took Fannie Mae's debt portfolio off the government balance sheet; Fannie Mae was converted into a publicly traded company owned by investors.

I don't blame Bush for he was just the right cheerleader people in power wanted to get their agenda across without interference. Mr. Bush thought that he was helping the real Americans, the rich and the super-rich. All the rest were not in his sight for a better America. I feel that this 30 trillion dollar problem now will get solved, but it wont go without pain and suffering to the all nations. We can only hope that "the sun will come out tomorrow."

GWB have been in charge of the country for 8 years. He can't be responsible for nothing.Or he is responsible for nothing and that is indeed the problem..

GWB have upset the world for 8 years (including your EU cousins and brothers), have lie to you guys (american), have won election he should have loose, have refuse to do anything for the global warming etc and as if all that was not enough, he is having responsibilities now in a major world economical crisis, despite his departure.

This is the kind of misinformation that is being spread by mostly the right wing that really gets to my nerve. If you want to make a point at least make it correctly.. (sorry, please don't take it as a personal attack; I am just arguing based on facts).

Subprime load is nothing new and it also preferred to loads given to people with bad credit records. Since they have a higher rate of default the borrowers charge higher interest rates and fees. Many institutes entered this market in the early 1990s the interest rate was low, and there's nothing inherently wrong with lending to those with bad credit history as the risks are spread; and when it involves banks, i.e. public trustees of our deposits, as long as they are properly regulated by adequate laws that forbid them from taking too much risk, subprime load is just part of our normal economic activities.

People try to blame Clinton not because of subprime load/mortgage, but Fannie Mae was his baby, an underwriter of those mortgages founded in 1998. But the creation of Fannie was based on sound social policy that a lot of institutes were racially profiling borrowers. I will leave it others to argue whether it's a good idea to engage wholesale home ownership, but there again is nothing wrong with the system itself if properly regulated.

The whole root of the crisis is essentially these: (1) right under the noise of Bush II administration, the banks/institutes involved in giving out subprime loads were engaging in predatory practices of misrepresenting the risks to borrowers; (2) banks/institutes were allowed, again under Bush II supervision and further deregulation, to package those loads into trade-able securities, thereby (i) misrepresenting the level of risk the financial institutes were getting themselves into by giving out those dodgy loads, (ii) spreading the risk globally.

All the whole interest rate was kept low for political agenda, and the US govt itself was involving in reckless lending with nothing to base on other than the voodoo economy of Reagan era, i.e. debt is NOT a problem.

All economy goes in boom-bust cycle, even Greenspan, who was once God, with his tail between his legs, admitted that the whole MO of the last 8 years was to delay the bust; which, if you think about it, was right about the time of his statement of "irrational exuberance". He KNEW what he was doing at the time, which was to let the economy soft land but there was a political agenda to serve.

So that is why Bush II IS TOTALLY RESPONSIBLE.

So what I'm getting from this discussion is lets forget about everyone else (consumers, other leaders) it’s not your problem the economy tanked on one person GWB.

But in reality many hands were in the cookie Jar. I never personally accused Clinton or anyone else of being the problem. I listed some history on what is rumored through the mass media as speculation whether I believe it or not is another story. The fact remains we are in this problem together and for one I am not a right or left supporter so the assumption I must be buying in to the right wing Kool Aide is incorrect. So it’s interesting how that assumption came about. There are many factors involving this mess and if you look deeper I acknowledged Bush did in fact have his hands in the mess. BTW I never mentioned Fannie Mae you did. But that wasn’t the only thing Clinton created.

There is a lot of finger pointing going around however that will never solve the problem.

As far as I am concerned there isn't enough bad that can be said about Bush Jr. (and Sr. too for that matter). But what brought us and so much of the world to this problematic state is way more than Bush and all of those who came with and brought them into power. In this Alice-in-Wonderland life ours, we are subject to an omniverous, self-righteous cabal who claim superior morality and fiscal responsibility even in the face of having created the greatest level of fiscal debt and irresponsibility ever in our history. It makes the Roaring Twenties pale in comparison.

Yet when we don't learn from the past we are condemmed to live it again.

It's about rampant consumerism on virtually every level. It's about having an economy in which the mainstream population was gambling in the stock market as if it was a Las Vegas in which rising values and winning were the only options. It's about a society in which millions of this fake money were being spent on birthday parties and bar mitzvahs while there wasn't enough money to provide meds and housing for those living with HIV/AIDS and feed the poor in this, the richest country in the world.

It's where the madness of celebrity worship obsesses over Paris H and Britney, who is boffing who and so-called "reality" television while iindifferent to homelessness and the increasingly desperate circumstances of a true reality, that we don't have enough housing for mainstream working people.

It's where the thousands dead and dying here and abroad of wars and starvation are ignored. It's about an America in which hardworking people have to consider choosing between paying for enough food and medications or paying their rent or mortgages.

Challenging these problems goes largely uncovered by the celebrity obsessed media. A media which is largely owned by individuals and corporations which are a part of the problem. And an America in which the profits of insurance companies absolutely takes precedence over the health of Americans.

The possibility of beginning to work to find new alternatives is further obscured by the murderously skillful bureaucrats, zillionaires and reactionaries.

It's downright discouraging, yes it is. And yet I have some faith that the basic untidiness of human beings may succeed in subverting the determined evils of which I speak.

Happy Sunday to all.

All of this is nothing suddenly new. It's been coming on for decades.

One of the many valuable things I have learned in the HIV epidemic is that as discouraging as things are at time, gotta keep going because to give up is just NOT ACCEPTABLE. So in the face of all this nihilism, pull up our socks, shoulders back and onward!

This is certainly an unending issue with lots of speculation on who, what, when where, and why all this happened... the real problem to me seems to be what are we ( ALL OF US) going to do now? you/ me and any one else can go on endlessly "discussing this" slinging around "factual" insults but what are YOU prepared to do about it??? ..I find , as Andy pointed out , that it is like Having HIV ....NOW WHAT....are you going to try to find a way to go on or just keep whining about ...why?? why? who? who? ... with no real action taken......

Did anyone refuse to take loans they really couldn't afford? did anyone buy property or "investments" that were "guaranteed" if so by whom??? did anyone , in the US at least, save a significant portion of whatever income they had for a "rainy day"? ( the US savings rate over the past few years has hovered near the zero % mark.....) this could go on for dozens of did anyone....? but what are you going to do now ??

The solution is not in what the government can do for you but what are you going to do for yourself....??

I came into this world shortly after the great depression and lived most of my early life with participants of that terrible time.....they learned how to get along..to help others no matter how little you had , to be frugal, to not buy things you cant pay for...having to use credit or get loans was a moral deficiency and only the last possible resort and for many not a possibility at all...we ( all of US here in the US) have enjoyed a very luxurious standard of living for a long time, many of us still do.... that's why all the immigrants risk their lives to come here...even now... I see many of them around here enjoying ( for them) an almost unbelievable level of security and prosperity..they start businesses...they live very modestly ( luxuriously by where they came from) and work hard...even the ones that get sick don't expect the government to take care of them,,,family does what they can for as long as they can....they don't expect a handout or a bailout by the government...they make their own opportunities....

I am not some sort of idiot I know you cant go back and I know many people have become so dependant on some sort of "GOVT/ community" assistance that there is no way for them to "go back"...maybe we could just tone down the expectations a few notches.....not everyone can/should own a house,two cars, a vacation home, have paid vacations and "guaranteed" retirement accounts...if they cant support such a lifestyle without government assistance...

I am sure there are and always have been those who just cant help themselves, society as a whole has always taken care of those persons... sometimes the "care" was harsh even horrible

Bottom line you have to live with the outcomes of your own decisions/actions.. move on and decide what you can do for yourself now...

So what I'm getting from this discussion is lets forget about everyone else (consumers, other leaders) it’s not your problem the economy tanked on one person GWB.

The answer is - NO, as a consumer, I AM NOT TO BLAME. The whole idea that somehow the irresponsible behaviors of the people should be blamed is often the last excuse of politicans/ruling class. You got yourself into this, not me, they say.

If you care to really look at this credit crisis all the bad consumer loads (money lended to purchase) is ONLY a small part of the problem; and consumer loads, as they are, are not toxic or even risky because as long as that person is alive and working s/he is still capable of paying back in the future. But now of course you have the irresponsible consumer portraited by the media as your average low income Joe who has walked into a car dealer and bought a big SUV that he couldn't afford.

It's NOT for me or you to say whether he can afford it - it's the LENDER. If the lender comes to you and offer almost zero interest rate to buy this big fancy car with no down payment, the correct respond is not, hmmmm, can I afford it? The correct respond is WHERE DO I SIGN.

And we make decisions in the market based on past trends and imperfect information. For the last 2-3 generations, despite the boom-bust cycles, things have been going just up and up. the expectation was - I couldn't afford it now, but I could reasonably expect that in the future. And if the financial institutes that are offering me the loads are telling me I could, why the hell not.

And then the sensible question is - WHO and WHAT FORCE kept this line of credit coming? WHO and WHAT FORCE ignored their duties to regulate reckless lending? And WHO and WHAT FORCE continued to feed the markets sentiment that debt didn't matter? Not me, not you, not the consumers. And you expect that average Joe to figure it all out to be sensible enough NOT to sign on that load application..

I don't think any president, not just that last idiot we had, is 'innocent' for his failures. Negligence is NO excuse, especially when one has the best (supposed) intelligence and resources at hand. There are only two reasons - not excuses - that I can think of for GWB's failures - he was just plain stupid and made a lot of mistakes or he intentionally did what he wanted, consequences be damned. I don't mean that I expect perfection from anybody. When it's not clear that the general population's interests are the primary concern and we see failure after failure, there's just not a lot of other 'excuses' that I can think of.

AS for ME, as an individual, being to blame? I hardly think so. I don't have debt that I can't and don't pay off. Our house is valued several times more than the loan balance, and I've lived here since '91. We improve the house as we go without getting into debt. My cars are old - '97 & '98 - and paid for. I don't have risky investments causing me financial issues; I really don't have any investments except for the house and my work retirement. I may be liberal in most ways, but when it comes to my finances, I am very conservative.

I'm aware that you blame Bush. Simple answer; we have gone away from traditional values which made us a great nation. Not everyone understands GDP, and how to be prudent and sensible when making decisions regarding money. I don't expect society to act with the financial wits of a genius. I feel bad for people that got in to this mess but I don't sympathize I empathize with them. It's not my responsibility or concern when someone takes a ARM or a interest only loan and forecloses due to bad decisions. I don’t even own a home but if I did it would be a fixed rate mortgage. Your right the consumers are a part of the problem not the main reason. BTW I didn't rank them in order of significance just random reasons. I tend to look at the whole picture not just one person.

Big point of this all I don't put the blunt of the blame on consumers that do the right thing. The consumers I do blame are the irresponsible ones that tryed to live beyond their means. However the main blame in my book goes to the financial leaders, investors, and corrupt politicians along with past presidents that do business behind closed doors. Sure you can quote me trillions of dollars and keep telling me that Bush is the only one to blame and that’s fine. I'm well aware of Bushes failures during his tenure I hear it every day. Truth be told I don't like the guy.

If anyone thinks Obama alone and maybe another future responsible President after him will fix this mess then they'll be sadly disappointed. As much as I want Obama to succeed I feel bad that he is put up to god like status because if he does make a mistake what will be the reaction? That is why he has big shoes to fill because people are expecting so much of him.

Last point- if this country is to change for the better then the public needs to be engaged and learn from the past not repeat it.

The definition of Insanity- Doing the same thing and expecting a different result.

Mike, your last post was the most sensible one you've made in this entire thread. I'd take it a bit farther, though. A president is a leader. He should lead. When the signs that there are problems are there, in terms of economy, social programs, environment, health care, whatever, it's his responsibility to somehow try to correct it. I realize no president can make an overspending, irresponsible consumer frugal and responsible. I also know that he likely couldn't have single-handedly made everything better. I do expect the president to lead, to work towards improving conditions, to leave his final term with some direction for improving whatever ails the US at that time.

I guess that, when I think of our previous president, I look for things that have improved in the US during his terms. Sadly, I can't think of any (that's not to say there aren't any, I just don't know of 'em).

Mike, your last post was the most sensible one you've made in this entire thread. I'd take it a bit farther, though. A president is a leader. He should lead. When the signs that there are problems are there, in terms of economy, social programs, environment, health care, whatever, it's his responsibility to somehow try to correct it. I realize no president can make an overspending, irresponsible consumer frugal and responsible. I also know that he likely couldn't have single-handedly made everything better. I do expect the president to lead, to work towards improving conditions, to leave his final term with some direction for improving whatever ails the US at that time.

I guess that, when I think of our previous president, I look for things that have improved in the US during his terms. Sadly, I can't think of any (that's not to say there aren't any, I just don't know of 'em).

Your right in the end the President is ultimatley responsible for the nation. Sure he is a figurehead and cant control everything but realistically the situation is what it is. Bush should've done something to stop this.

I guess I was trying to steer away from "It's Bushes fault because he sucks...or tryed to pick up his dads mistakes etc...because yes we all know what he's done. I think he crawled up in to a bush at the end of his tenure and realized how bad he screwed up. No matter what my politcial affilation is. As a Democrat I would say yeah he sucked good riddance, as a Republican I would think the same thing and hope Jeb Bush never runs.

I was trying to challenge a few people that said things like well we went to war that is why he is responsible. I feel if anyone is going to tell me that Bush is responsible tell me why you think so and don't just go for the media portrayed reasons. Sure I believe Bush is responsible in more ways than one but I don't see him as the only person. He may of very well put us in to the recession much earlier by exorbant spending.

I also think what if 9/11 never happened, would we have gone to war? Would we be in this mess? Maybe if these scenario's were the case Obama wouldn't be Presdent maybe the recession would've happened later or not at all. A lot of what ifs.

It's NOT for me or you to say whether he can afford it - it's the LENDER. If the lender comes to you and offer almost zero interest rate to buy this big fancy car with no down payment, the correct respond is not, hmmmm, can I afford it? The correct respond is WHERE DO I SIGN.

THAT IS MOST DEFINITELY NOT THE CORRECT RESPONSE!!!!!!!!!Actually, this is exactly why consumers (SOME, not all....) are partly to blame for this mess. To say that a consumer should not wonder whether he can afford this loan because it is offered to him is nuts. While, I agree that consumers are not the biggest part of this problem -- this attitude is their contribution.

When I bought my house, I was offered all sorts of loans -- including some ARMs that would have saved me a lot of money in the beginning. However, I DID say "Will I be able to afford this when the rates go up?". My answer was -- "I don't know -- I can't read the future, I think I'll go with something that will remain the same and not possible skyrocket beyond my ability to pay". So, I signed on a fixed-rate loan. It is absolutely incumbent upon a consumer to consider whether they can pay back any debt that they sign up for. Yes -- banks should be looking at a person's risk of default before offering them a loan and they bare their own share of the responsibility pie here -- but they didn't force that consumer to sign on the dotted line.

Is Bush responsible -- Yes, he has his part too. I hate defending this man with my entire being, but he did not single-handedly cause this financial meltdown (there -- I've said it out loud now.....).

It all gets down to greed -- greed of bankers, of investors and, YES, of consumers (again -- SOME, not all) who wanted things that they knew they couldn't afford.

So -- the original question is not a good one -- because Bush didn't do it alone.......

I agree that GWB has done more damage to the US, in the last eight years, than possibly any American president. I truly believe the man is as evil as he is cold, calculating and surely anti-freeze flows through his veins. Many of his acts and decisions, in my opinion, border on treason, but that is for a higher court to judge.

When I look for the reason, why America is derailing on its track into the future, I have to look no further than the nearest mirror. We are in the mess we are in, because we allowed this to happen. Something very precious has been lost in America and that is the spirit of sacrifice and compromise. Everyone is so busy looking for the “ones” who caused all of this to happen, when those people are we. I know you have heard it before, but my parents were part of the greatest generation. Their parents immigrated to our shores, made a life for themselves and vowed that their progeny would have opportunities, that they had never dreamed possible. They had a remarkable work ethic, believed in paying for only what you could afford and found pleasure in the simple act of living.

I grew up in America that cherished what made her unique and that her greatest strength came from the diversity of her citizens. If you want to imagine what America was like back then, think of 9/11 and the weeks following. We remained true to ourselves, differences intact, yet America spoke with one voice and whatever she asked, her citizens delivered. Sadly, over the decades, something has gone horribly wrong. As growth soared in America, the world was ours for the picking. We bought and consumed and drilled and over fished and too many of us, myself included, lived beyond our means. Somewhere over time, we have lost our core principles and now, as we enter the 21st Century, we find our country in tatters and the earth in revolt.

We allowed our financial markets to develop programs and products, which even the accountants could not fathom, without the use of super computers. We consume much more than we produce, but we refuse to recycle, even a small portion of what we take from the earth. We have overfished one-half of the fisheries in the world and energy consumption will increase 70% over the next 30 years, while renewable energy remains just a dream. We allow our companies to rape and pillage our land and citizens, all in pursuit of profit. Yes, we must lay the blame at the feet of those who over extended themselves, but what about the companies that sold indescribably intricate mortgages, many designed to simply drain as much money as possible, from the homeowner, in the least amount of time possible?. Meanwhile, our president, his administration, Congress and our governors and mayors, failed our country, period. Yet, there is so much blame to spread around, but at what cost?

We find ourselves in a world that is so intricately weaved together that problems, on one continent can have global implications. American is in trouble, but we are one country and are fortunate, that at least we have the capacity to prop up our markets. However, what about the European Union, parts of Europe are imploding at astonishing rates, with countries like Iceland, Italy and Greece facing serious financial challenges. Except, the EU is not one country, but a union of countries and they have a mutual need to stabilize the European markets. Sadly, the smaller countries do not have the resources that we do and so they must look to their richer neighbours, like France and Germany to provide any capital they need. I would not want to be a leader in say France, having to explain to my citizens, why we need to bail out Italians. Sadly, at some point they will have to, to stabilize the economy across Europe and not just locally. We have spent decades building a global market and it is now broken and it will take a global effort to stabilize the world financial markets.

I believe that 2008 was a pivotal time in human history. I believe that America needs to return to the land of opportunity and compassion and she needs to become a better global citizen. We had better agree that we are trashing this planet, before we reach the point, where nature decides that enough is enough. Unlike humans, nature does not do bailouts. Yes, these are hard times, but we have a chance here to return to what makes America great and provide the leadership that the world so desperately craves, through our own initiatives. It is time that we lead by example and work to redefine how we want to live our lives.

We live in a world governed by the laws of nature, not those imposed by humanity. By our very nature, humans, make mistakes. Look around you and you see the reality of those mistakes. Yes, people are accountable for criminal actions and we must examine the Bush years, if only to know the truth of what happened and to correct anything that goes against core American values.

Yes, we must stabilize our markets, our country, but what about the earth? Humans number 6+ billion and we just keep on breeding. I have read estimates that the world’s population, could top 9 billion, by 2040. That is 50% more population that we have today. How exactly are we going to support that kind of growth? Eventually oils importance will diminish and water will be the oil of the 21st century. In many parts of the world, you can live without oil, but you cannot live without water, or food and we cannot even feed the six billion that are already here.

It is time for America, both as a country and global citizen to reshape our country into one that can propel the American dream, but in a way, that is sustainable in human costs and global resources.

Well, I have a few comments on this subject. First, is why do Republicans want America to be in so much misery. This "recession" seems more like a depression, not like anything seen since the great depression. Why does the Republican Party want Obama and America to fail? Especially in a time when one in 7 Americans is either unemployed or is underemployed(not having the a job they are qualified to do).

Bill Clinton gave W a very strong economy. W then took that strength and ruined it. Even prior to that, in 1993 not one single Republican voted for Clinton's tax package which passed by only one vote in the House and required VP Al Gore to break the tie in the Senate. It was then that the wall Street Journal reported that Clinton's proposal which included a few tax increases on super wealthy people would lead this country into a terrible depression. But instead we had the single greatest economic boom in American history. In terms of length of time(1993-2000) in jobs created and the national surplus.The rich were richer, the middle class were richer the poor were richer and of course the Government was richer. we had more money than we even knew what to do with. Clinton wanted to use some to pay down the Social Security program to rid it of it's entitlement problems. Times were good. So good that Alan Greenspan(the Federal Reserve Chairman at the time) went to the Hill and argued that the surplus was dangerous because we were going to pay off our entire national debt and then what would we do with the rest of the money.The Republicans then complained there were no wars, aside from the one in Bosnia. Also they complained that Bill Clinton liked to get a little nookie on the side. And then we spent a year talking about Monica's dress because we had nothing more important to discuss.

Then comes W. He ran all of that into the ground. Even before 9/11 the economy was taking a turn for the worse and W did what Republicans do. He stole from the poor to give to the rich. Huge tax cuts for the super wealthy which left the rest of us behind. Then w spent money like it was going out of style. Not on bridges or infrastructure or things that help the country or things like levees to protect New Orleans. He spent it on defense contracts and Haliburton. An what of the 12 Billion that got misplaced in Iraq? And speaking of Iraq, the defense surge wasn't a big help there, It was paying off our enemies. The enemies that kill Americans, Iraqis and insurgents. Everyone wants to be paid.

W also gave money to wall Street. Some people made lots of money. Gambling on credit derivative swaps. That left us in quite a mess. No comparison really outside of the great depression. So in W's 8 years in office of spending spending spending we are where we are today. And after all that, giving away the house, the farm and all the other real estate in America the republicans are saying no more. They had no problem spending when times were good. When we should have had a surplus. And of course the tax cuts for the people doing the hedge funds. Don't forget those.

Now Obama is in charge and the Republicans don't want to spend. And of course the Republicans are the party of NO. And Congressman Pete Sessions says the Republicans have now adopted the Taliban strategy. The "I hope he fails" strategy says Rush Limbaugh(who is the leader of the party)and of course the Republicans want Obama to fail because right now it is the Bush(republican) depression. we all understand it is W and the Republicans in Congress that are to blame for the mess to start with. They gave money to the rich, didn't regulate it and gambled the future away. We all know that!

But we can recover buy putting Obama's policies into effect by 2010 or 2011. Why not? The Govt as the one party of last resort if acting quickly enough can fix things in the next year or so. That's assuming the Republicans don't derail the whole thing. And by doing that they can change the Bush depression into the Obama depression. Afterall who needs education and Pell Grants and universal health care and higher fuel standards for cars or funding embryonic stem cell research or allowing people to join unions.

And when Obama reached out to Republicans they said NO. And the polls say most Americans approve of Obama and the Democratic Congress and around 58% disapprove of the Republicans in Congress.It's clear Obama is reaching out to Republicans and they are saying NO. But who needs them Obama can get to 60% no problem.

So yes W and his cronies are responsible in my view for the economic crisis.